Obama, Democrats suing to block military voting in Ohio? Update: No

posted at 11:21 am on August 3, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Well … maybe, but that depends on what remedy the lawsuit demands. The DNC, Ohio Democrats, and the campaign for Barack Obama’s re-election have indeed filed a lawsuit in Ohio over an exception for early voting for members of the military and civilians overseas, claiming it sets up an unconstitutionally “disparate” treatment from other voters. But does that mean eliminating the exception altogether, or extending it to everyone?

Fifteen military groups are opposing a federal lawsuit in Ohio brought by President Barack Obama’s campaign because they say it could threaten voter protections afforded to service members, such as the extended time they have to cast a ballot.

Obama’s campaign and Democrats filed the lawsuit last month against Ohio’s top elections official in a dispute over the battleground state’s law that restricts early, in-person voting during the final three days before Election Day.

The campaign, the Democratic National Committee and the Ohio Democratic Party contend the law unfairly ends in-person voting for most Ohioans three days earlier than it does for military and overseas voters.

Attorneys for the Democrats argue such “disparate” treatment is unconstitutional, and all voters should be able to vote on those days.

Breitbart’s Mike Flynn and these military groups assume that the lawsuits intend to restrict access to the military to the Friday deadline, the same as everyone else in Ohio:

On July 17th, the Obama for America Campaign, the Democratic National Committee, and the Ohio Democratic Party filed suit in OH to strike down part of that state’s law governing voting by members of the military. Their suit said that part of the law is “arbitrary” with “no discernible rational basis.”

Currently, Ohio allows the public to vote early in-person up until the Friday before the election. Members of the military are given three extra days to do so. While the Democrats may see this as “arbitrary” and having “no discernible rational basis,” I think it is entirely reasonable given the demands on servicemen and women’s time and their obligations to their sworn duty. …

I think it’s unconscionable that we as a nation wouldn’t make it as easy as possible for members of the military to vote. They arguably have more right to vote than the rest of us, since it is their service and sacrifice that ensures we have the right to vote in the first place.

But is the remedy sought by Democrats to force members of the military to adhere to the Friday deadline, or to eliminate the deadline altogether? Neither the KTVU nor the Bloomberg reports make it clear what remedy the plaintiffs seek — and that’s really the crux of the issue here.

Prior to changes in the law passed by the Republican-controlled state legislature and by Governor John Kasich, everyone could submit an early ballot in person or by mail all the way through Monday, but access over the weekend for in-person voting was inconsistent in Ohio’s 88 counties. The counties would have to pay overtime over these weekends to keep offices open, which is probably why some didn’t do so. The new law restricted early voting to the Friday before the election, but left an exception for military members to cast votes in person through Monday.

The question then becomes this: why not let everyone cast votes on Monday, too? What state interest is being served by having all the facilities for early voting open on Monday but only limiting access to them for those in the armed service? It’s certainly nice to give troops a perk, but if the polling booths are open, why restrict it at all? It’s a fair question, especially if the remedy sought is to extend that Monday deadline for everyone.

However, it’s a big mistake for Team Obama and the DNC to have gotten involved in the suit. No matter how reasonable the issue might be, it still looks like they’re objecting to an accommodation for military voting. If the state Democratic Party wanted to file the lawsuit, why not let them take all of the political flak for it?

Update: Like I said, the likely remedy proposed would be to remove the Friday deadline for everyone — and that’s exactly what the plaintiffs are proposing. Gabriel Malor forwarded me a link to the brief, and the relevant language within it:

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request of this Court the following equitable relief:…

B. A preliminary and permanent order prohibiting the Defendants, their respective agents, servants, employees, attorneys, successors, and all persons acting in concert with each or any of them, from implementing or enforcing lines 863 and 864 of Sec. 3509.03 (I) in HB 224, and/or the SB 295 enactment of Ohio Revised Code § 3509.03 with the HB 224 amendments, thereby restoring in-person early voting on the three days immediately preceding Election Day for all eligible Ohio voters;

So no, they aren’t trying to block military members from getting to the polls, but arguing that since the polls will be open anyway, everyone else should have access to them as well. A couple of commenters think this will be a “logistical nightmare,” but the logistics aren’t really that scaleable. Having the polls open for a few would be the same as having them open for many. There may need to be few more election judges, but those positions are voluntary anyway.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Comments

The campaign, the Democratic National Committee and the Ohio Democratic Party contend the law unfairly ends in-person voting for most Ohioans three days earlier than it does for military and overseas voters.

Yeah, lots of luck defending that position with 15 military groups allied against you and the perception that you are targeting the military vote.

Makes one wonder even if the ballots get there on time, who knows for sure they would be counted? I do not trust bho/team AT ALL and if they think it is going to be really tight for bho, no telling what they will do?
L

Imagine trying that with Israeli Defense Army where I had the honor of serving. Had they tried to prevent voting they’d have an open mutiny on their hands within a minute. U.S. Army are undisputed heroes on the battlefield but unfortunately their balls only function against *foreign* enemy.

So after reading the article, no they’re not really. But we at HotAir are going to post the inflammatory libelous headline anyway! Nice try, but #desperationfail. inthemiddle on August 3, 2012 at 11:32 AM

The military is special, and there have been laws giving military members special accommodations for voting for quite a while now.

This particular provision may be an unnecessary accommodation — I’m not clear on why military members need extra days for in-person early voting — but what is telling is that Team Obama didn’t sense any political foolishness in directly attacking it.

They don’t actually see the military as a fighting force making sacrifices for America. If they did, or if they at least respected the view of other Americans on this topic, they would have handled this differently. (Seriously, as a practical matter, how much can it matter to the outcome of the vote that military members in Ohio have extra days for early in-person voting?)

The question then becomes this: why not let everyone cast votes on Monday, too? What state interest is being served by having all the facilities for early voting open on Monday but only limiting access to them for those in the armed service?

Might be easier to just make sure military types and others are getting absentee ballots. (Not that those never get contested…)

It’s the appearance of this administration’s stance on military votes that counts right now. Ed’s right, Ohio shouldn’t restrict Monday early voting to just military, but why did the administration get involved? Did the number of military groups aligned against the local DNC cause the DNC to call in the big Obama guns?

As much as I don’t like early voting, it is often a necessity for military voters. Wright-Patterson AFB in Dayton, for example, has 24/7 ops that sometimes turn into days-long shifts as “the fit hits the shan.” Also, as much as the military encourages its members to vote, there is an underlying mentality, especially after Florida in 2000, that in many districts overseas ballots will disappear… into a dumpster. Obama’s DoJ stances have not allayed those fears, which is why it doesn’t look good for Obama to be involved in this Ohio issue.

Give me a break. You mean to say after nearly four years of the malicious lawlessness and thuggery and underhandedness of this crowd, you actually are wondering?

rrpjr on August 3, 2012 at 11:37 AM

My guess it that the Dems want to be able to shuttle people around over that weekend. Keep in mind some of the most notorious voter registration fraud scandals orchestrated by ACORN were in Ohio. Those people didn’t go away just because their organization changed names.

It’s the appearance of this administration’s stance on military votes that counts right now. Ed’s right, Ohio shouldn’t restrict Monday early voting to just military, but why did the administration get involved? Did the number of military groups aligned against the local DNC cause the DNC to call in the big Obama guns?

As much as I don’t like early voting, it is often a necessity for military voters. Wright-Patterson AFB in Dayton, for example, has 24/7 ops that sometimes turn into days-long shifts as “the fit hits the shan.” Also, as much as the military encourages its members to vote, there is an underlying mentality, especially after Florida in 2000, that in many districts overseas ballots will disappear… into a dumpster. Obama’s DoJ stances have not allayed those fears, which is why it doesn’t look good for Obama to be involved in this Ohio issue.

pookysgirl on August 3, 2012 at 11:42 AM

This is the real problem with this issue – optics. And its all egg on the face for the administration.

I was kinda ‘meh’ on this at first. Extending early voting didn’t really make any sense to me.

But considering this administrations stance on absentee ballots and the Democrats trying to supress them for years, eff ‘em.

As some other commenters said, don’t trust them on this, regardless of the actual facts. There is probably an underlying agenda here.

The crux of the suit is that members of the military who want to take advantage of this MUST PROVE WHO THEY ARE.

The left is desperate to convince anyone they are able to fool that requiring someone to prove their identity at the polls somehow magically disenfranchises zillions of “minorities.”

The truth that ID requirements empower voters is something the left is desperate to destroy.

They’re also know that most members of the military will not vote for an obvious Marxist. Lawsuits and bureaucratic maneuvers to inhibit military voters is nothing new. This is just the latest example of it. In the past, they’ve successfully fought to have absentee ballots from military personnel tossed out.

it’s a big mistake for Team Obama and the DNC to have gotten involved in the suit. No matter how reasonable the issue might be, it still looks like they’re objecting to an accommodation for military voting.

No sir, not gonna matter, because no one’s going to hear about it. The kneepad media will make sure of that. If a tree falls in the forest…

In the lawsuit there is a line that says the military and non-military are “similar situation” which is where they get “claiming it sets up an unconstitutionally “disparate” treatment from other voters.”

Regardless of whether they want to extend the days for the civilians or take back the three days from the military they are saying Ohio is not treating their voters the same which is bogus. They are claiming the military and non-military are in a “similar situation” and there for the voting should be the same but that isn’t true.

The very fact that someone is in the military changes things. A citizen’s status as a citizen changes along with the laws that govern them. So to say military and non-military are equal or are in “similar situations” is wrong.

So you are essentially saying that “election day” in Ohio should be extended. I think perhaps before railing against legislatures we should find out the reasoning behind the restrictions.

[Happy Nomad on August 3, 2012 at 11:46 AM]

LOL. Ohio has already extended “election day” back to late September with their early voting legislation. I think perhaps you should have read the article with comprehension in mind.

I’d tell you the actual date but the the Secretary of State page informing voters of this is still informing us about 2010! Their 2012 election calendar, with some 50-100 dates of importance doesn’t even cover early voting.

So after reading the article, no they’re not really. But we at HotAir are going to post the inflammatory libelous headline anyway! Nice try, but #desperationfail.
inthemiddle on August 3, 2012 at 11:32 AM

And there is no intelligence in your mindless bleating. Nobody is saying you have to have served to vote but is it really all that hard for a moron like you to at least acknowledge that those young people who have served multiple tours in combat and daily serve this nation in uniform deserve some respect?

I guess so since just the idea of showing any respect is enough to set you off.

I’d tell you the actual date but the the Secretary of State page informing voters of this is still informing us about 2010! Their 2012 election calendar, with some 50-100 dates of importance doesn’t even cover early voting.

And there is no intelligence in your mindless bleating. Nobody is saying you have to have served to vote but is it really all that hard for a moron like you to at least acknowledge that those young people who have served multiple tours in combat and daily serve this nation in uniform deserve some respect?

I guess so since just the idea of showing any respect is enough to set you off.

Happy Nomad on August 3, 2012 at 12:06 PM

They arguably have more right to vote than the rest of us

What does that mean to you? How do you interpret that statement?

And talk about scary? I was wrong to be afraid of that guy. You, I’m terrified of. A person who so easily conflates “respect” and “rights” is a person who, arguably, should not have he right to vote.

But Obama administration is not trying to restrict military members from voting during those days. They are trying to open up the already open polling places to everyone else

Yes, it has bad optics, but you’re really taking liberties with the truth here.

segasagez on August 3, 2012 at 11:50 AM

No. The complaint in the lawsuit is that military members are given extra days for early in-person voting, and that that is unequal treatment before the law. Period.

As Ed says, we don’t know what remedy has been or might be proposed. Your statement is invalid. I’m sure you are simply wrong, or didn’t think about it hard enough, and that it is not the case that you are taking liberties with the truth. It is a bad practice to accuse people of that merely because you disagree with them.

They are claiming the military and non-military are in a “similar situation” and there for the voting should be the same but that isn’t true.

[TturnP on August 3, 2012 at 12:00 PM]

Sure it is, unless the very specific circumstances are explicit. Why should a member of the military who has no pressing reason for voting on Monday be allowed to vote while a citizen under the same circumstance can’t?

Your failure here is to exempt a class of people merely on the possibility of their having a problem exercising their right to vote which doesn’t treat all people equally, rather than exempt for the reason which treats all people equally. That’s backwards and disparate.

And talk about scary? I was wrong to be afraid of that guy. You, I’m terrified of. A person who so easily conflates “respect” and “rights” is a person who, arguably, should not have he right to vote.

segasagez on August 3, 2012 at 12:10 PM

I interpret the statement as simply saying that we should ensure that the votes of those serving the nation in uniform count. The military performs a role for society that mouth-breathing slackers like you do not.

And BTW, you don’t get to decide who has a right to vote (thankfully).

Sure it is, unless the very specific circumstances are explicit. Why should a member of the military who has no pressing reason for voting on Monday be allowed to vote while a citizen under the same circumstance can’t?

They don’t actually see the military as a fighting force making sacrifices for America. If they did, or if they at least respected the view of other Americans on this topic, they would have handled this differently. (Seriously, as a practical matter, how much can it matter to the outcome of the vote that military members in Ohio have extra days for early in-person voting?)

The Obami just can’t help themselves. It’s amazing to watch them.

J.E. Dyer on August 3, 2012 at 11:39 AM

No they see it as only a photo prop, when the Fresh Prince of Bill Ayers wants to show his “patriotism”. What else would explain their constant attempts to gut the defense budget, cancel missile defense plans, etc.?

The d-cRAT socialists’ efforts at suppressing the vote of those in the US military – particular those stationed outside the US – has been on-going for many years. In the 2008 and 2010 elections, for example, several of the socialist states, CA, NY, IL and others, delayed sending out ballots (in violation of various statues) to these overseas personnel so that it became impossible for them to get the completed ballots back by the deadline.

Look for similar despicable actions by OBOZO’s d-cRAT socialist criminals to stop the military vote in the upcoming election.

No. The complaint in the lawsuit is that military members are given extra days for early in-person voting, and that that is unequal treatment before the law. Period.

As Ed says, we don’t know what remedy has been or might be proposed. Your statement is invalid. I’m sure you are simply wrong, or didn’t think about it hard enough, and that it is not the case that you are taking liberties with the truth. It is a bad practice to accuse people of that merely because you disagree with them.

J.E. Dyer on August 3, 2012 at 12:11 PM

This is completely disingenuous.

You state that the complain is “hat military members are given extra days for early in-person voting, and that that is unequal treatment before the law.”

That is true.

You then say:

“They don’t actually see the military as a fighting force making sacrifices for America. If they did, or if they at least respected the view of other Americans on this topic, they would have handled this differently. “

You are taking liberties with the truth because you are inventing more truth than currently exists. And ironically, given the whole “don’t actually see the military as a fighting force”, you chastise me for accusing people of something merely because you disagree with them. As I said before, intellectual consistency…

Democrats doing what Democrats do best…deny unimpeded voting rights to the only group of people who have earned the right above all others…but please let immigration laws be ignored and let the illegals pour over the border so they can vote for taxpayer goodies courtesy of Suga-Daddy Obama.

I interpret the statement as simply saying that we should ensure that the votes of those serving the nation in uniform count. The military performs a role for society that mouth-breathing slackers like you do not.

And BTW, you don’t get to decide who has a right to vote (thankfully).

Happy Nomad on August 3, 2012 at 12:16 PM

Firstly, god forbid I breath through my mouth like all other humans. You have some new way of breathing over there that I don’t know about?

More importantly, why should we ensure that the votes of those serving the nation in uniform count more than we ensure that those building the bridges or designing the software or flipping the burgers do? We should ensure that they all count.

Now, that may mean that we take steps for the military that we don’t need to take for those others. However, we take those steps because everyone’s right to vote is important, not because their right to vote is more important.

You’ve never done anything purposeful in your life, have you? I recognize the hate-filled envy of everything and everybody around you. God forbid that some group should be singled out for their efforts! You want everybody to be wallowing at whatever low level you’re at.

Now, that may mean that we take steps for the military that we don’t need to take for those others. However, we take those steps because everyone’s right to vote is important, not because their right to vote is more important.

You’ve never done anything purposeful in your life, have you? I recognize the hate-filled envy of everything and everybody around you. God forbid that some group should be singled out for their efforts! You want everybody to be wallowing at whatever low level you’re at.

Happy Nomad on August 3, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Are you sure you’re conservative?

Seriously though, if I wrote that, everyone would be screaming about how bloody a liberal I was.

“God forbid that some group should be singled out for their efforts!”

Hell, I’m with you there. We should treat people differently given their situation.

While this whole lawsuit is chicken sh*t, if any adjustment needs to be made to ‘accommodate’ the Democrats, it should be to extend the voting time for civilians to match that of the military, not the other way around.

If anyone deserves consideration in voting, it is the military personnel. They are actually doing something for the country. If the military is forced to the civilian standard, then it is unfair to them (time differential, postal service, more critical job demands, etc). Give the democrats three more days to dig up the dead and train their dogs.

My ‘sniff test’ for politically driven actions is if only a single party brings suit, it is very likely driven by political motives, and not the best interests of the country.

Mostly because it wasn’t in the initial stories, but also because DeWine, who I suppose is just doing his duty to defend existing legislation, responded to the suit frivolously, which I suppose is the only thing he could do.

So no, they aren’t trying to block military members from getting to the polls, but arguing that since the polls will be open anyway, everyone else should have access to them as well. A couple of commenters think this will be a “logistical nightmare,” but the logistics aren’t really that scaleable. Having the polls open for a few would be the same as having them open for many. There may need to be few more election judges, but those positions are voluntary anyway.

Wrong. Many more workers, ballots, and locations will be needed. This is just another attempt to steal the election. We really do have a lawless regime.

Plus early and absentee voting should be for military ONLY. Everyone else can get their butts to the polling places on election day.

Ed, please update your update and revisit the logic here. The argument is there is no difference between the military and private citizens. Therefore, private citizens should be allowed the same leeways as military. Not so. If the polls are crowded with non-military voters, that may restrict the ability of the military personnel to vote.

Please, give this some more thought. Obama is trying to obstruct their ability to vote in a devious and surreptitious way.

You’ve never done anything purposeful in your life, have you? I recognize the hate-filled envy of everything and everybody around you. God forbid that some group should be singled out for their efforts! You want everybody to be wallowing at whatever low level you’re at.

Happy Nomad on August 3, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Are you sure you’re conservative?

Seriously though, if I wrote that, everyone would be screaming about how bloody a liberal I was.

“God forbid that some group should be singled out for their efforts!”

Hell, I’m with you there. We should treat people differently given their situation.

All I’m saying is that no one deserves more rights than anyone else.

segasagez on August 3, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Really??? Do give us a reason why the fat, lazy ‘rest of the citizens’ that you keep going on and on and on about need to do early voting and why?? The military don’t work in the same environment like fhe rest of us do, they can be posted or deployed on short notice between the early voting and the normal day of voting for the rest of he citizens of the country, this is how they roll, and we have to make sure that hey vote and their votes are counted, hence the need for early voting for them and them alone…..what excuse do the citizenry have??? Does the federal government send them anywhere in particular at any time)????? then why the heck can’t get their butts to the polls and vote when they are supposed to…give me one reason why, and ow does tha compare to the situation of the military who are mostly in a state ora country different than their own at the time of voting???? How????